Anti-Consumption as a Means of Saving Jobs

Purpose – The paper aims to explore how idiosyncratic motives drive
participation in consumer boycotts and how the motives of different
adopters (e.g. innovators, laggards) differ. The study seeks to describe
how boycott motives are embedded in the fields of consumer resistance
and anti-consumption. Design/methodology/approach – The paper applies a
mixed-method approach of qualitative and quantitative methods. Internet
postings of 790 boycott supporters are analyzed by means of a content
analysis. The relevance of different motives is examined via frequency
analysis. Contingency analysis is applied to explore segment-specific
motives. Findings – Using the example of factory relocation, the study
identifies several idiosyncratic motives that are contingent to the
boycott cause. Additionally, it confirms that the motives of different
adopters differ. Individuals who are personally affected or feel
solidarity with those affected join the boycott relatively early whereas
those who join later consider the pros and cons of the boycott more
rationally.Research limitations/implications – Further research should
apply quantitative research methods to ensure the stability of the
findings. The external validity needs to be tested for different boycott
types. Practical implications – Some consumers join boycotts because
they feel solidarity with those affected by the actions of a company
(resistance-boycotter), whereas others generally criticize the
free-market economy and are generally prone to boycott any company
(anti-consumption-boycotters). Companies need to ensure that both types
of boycotters consider them socially responsible.Originality/value –
This study provides evidence that boycott motives are case-contingent.
Additionally, this is the first study to demonstrate how motives for
joining a boycott vary in the course of time.